(Philippine legal context – comprehensive overview)

Important note: This is general legal information based on Philippine law and jurisprudence as commonly understood. Laws and interpretations can change, and details of your situation matter a lot, so this should not replace advice from a Philippine lawyer.

I. Basic Concepts

In Philippine criminal law, slander (oral defamation) and unjust vexation are both offenses under the Revised Penal Code (RPC). They are often used in everyday conflicts involving:

Insults and name-calling
Public shaming or humiliation
Harassing or annoying acts that don’t neatly fall under more specific crimes

When people say, “I’ll file a case for paninirang puri or pambabastos,” they usually end up with complaints for slander, libel, slander by deed, or unjust vexation, depending on how the act was done.

This article focuses on:

What slander is
What unjust vexation is
How they differ
How a criminal complaint for these offenses is actually filed and processed in the Philippines

II. Legal Basis in the Revised Penal Code

1. Slander (Oral Defamation)

Article 358, Revised Penal Code – deals with oral defamation, commonly called slander.
Defamation is the imputation of a crime, vice, defect, or any act/omission that causes dishonor, discredit, or contempt to another person, communicated to a third person.

Defamation becomes libel if it is written, printed, broadcast, or made in a similarly permanent form (Article 355). It is slander if purely spoken or done by mere gestures.

2. Unjust Vexation

Article 287, Revised Penal Code – includes unjust vexation.
It is a catch-all offense meant to punish acts that cause annoyance, irritation, or distress to another person without lawful or justifiable reason, and which are not covered by other specific crimes.

Penalties of these offenses have been updated by later laws (like RA 10951, which adjusted fines and periods of imprisonment), but their basic nature and elements remain the same.

III. Slander (Oral Defamation)

A. Definition

Slander (oral defamation) is:

The malicious imputation, by spoken words or gestures, of a crime, vice, defect, act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance, which tends to cause dishonor, discredit, or contempt to another person, communicated to at least one third person.

B. Elements of Slander

For a criminal complaint to prosper, these elements typically must be shown:

There is an imputation
- Accusation of a crime (“magnanakaw”), moral defect (“pokpok”), vice (“adik”), or shameful conduct.
The imputation is made orally or by gestures
- Spoken words in person, over the phone (if heard by others), via microphone, public gathering, etc.
- Insulting gestures that clearly convey a defamatory meaning (for example, gestures widely understood to mean prostitution or infidelity), if seen by third persons.
The imputation is malicious
- Presumed in law if the words are defamatory and not privileged.
- Malice may be rebutted by showing good faith, privileged communication, or truthful statement made for a justifiable motive.
Directed at an identifiable person
- The complainant must be identifiable, either by name or by context (“yung kapitan natin na lasenggo”).
Publication
- A third person (not the complainant) heard or saw the defamatory statement.
- If only you and the other person are present, generally no publication, hence no slander.

C. Grave vs. Simple Oral Defamation

Philippine jurisprudence distinguishes:

Grave oral defamation – extremely insulting, involves accusations of serious crimes, highly immoral acts, or spoken in a manner that deeply wounds dignity (e.g., publicly calling someone a prostitute or criminal in a humiliating way).
Simple oral defamation – lesser insults, mild or casual remarks, despite being defamatory.

Courts look at:

The words used
The status/relationship of the parties
The circumstances: place, presence of others, tone, intent

Grave oral defamation carries a heavier penalty than simple oral defamation.

D. Penalties (Conceptual)

Without going into exact technical penalty ranges (which were adjusted by later laws), it’s enough to remember:

Grave oral defamation – can lead to several months to a few years of imprisonment, depending on circumstances.
Simple oral defamation – usually punished as a light offense, often with short-term imprisonment (arresto) or a fine, or both.

Courts have discretion to impose fines instead of jail time in many defamation cases, especially simple oral defamation.

E. Examples of Slander (Hypothetical)

At a barangay assembly, someone loudly accuses you:

“Magnanakaw ‘yan! Ninakaw niya ang pera ng association!” in front of 20 other residents.
During a company party, your supervisor announces over a microphone that you are “isang pokpok na pumapatoI sa mga kliyente” in front of co-workers.
In a public market, a vendor repeatedly shouts that you are a drug dealer, in the presence of customers and other vendors.

IV. Unjust Vexation

A. Definition

Unjust vexation covers a broad range of acts that:

Cause annoyance, irritation, distress, embarrassment, or slight harm to a person
Are done without lawful or justifiable motive
Are not otherwise penalized by another, more specific provision of law

It is often described as punishing the act of “nakakainis at wala sa lugar” when there is no specific crime that fits.

B. Elements of Unjust Vexation

An act is committed
- An affirmative act (ex: repeated unwanted teasing, blocking passage, petty harassment).
The act causes annoyance, vexation, irritation, or discomfort
- The offended party actually feels annoyed or vexed, and under reasonable standards it is indeed annoying/vexing.
The act is done without justifiable cause
- No legitimate right, duty, or lawful reason to do it.
Not covered by another specific offense
- If the act is actually physical injury, grave threats, serious illegal detention, etc., those specific crimes apply instead.

C. Penalty (Conceptual)

Unjust vexation is generally treated as a light offense, punishable by short-term imprisonment (arresto) or fine, or both. The exact scale of penalties has been updated by later laws in terms of amounts and ranges.

D. Examples of Unjust Vexation (Hypothetical)

Persistently following someone around in a mall, snickering and making suggestive noises, without touching or openly threatening them.
Repeatedly calling someone at night just to disturb them, without any valid reason.
Deliberately blocking someone’s path when they are trying to walk through a narrow corridor, just to annoy them.
Constantly mocking a person’s minor disability in school, not in a single big insult but through small, repeated acts of ridicule.

Some acts that people casually file as unjust vexation may actually be:

Acts of lasciviousness
Serious physical injuries or slight physical injuries
Grave or light threats

In such cases, the more serious offense typically applies.

V. Slander vs. Unjust Vexation: Key Differences

Aspect	Slander (Oral Defamation)	Unjust Vexation
Main interest protected	Reputation and honor	Peace of mind, comfort, and dignity
Nature of act	Defamatory words or gestures	Any annoying/vexing act not otherwise penalized
Requirement of “publication”	Yes – heard/seen by at least one third person	No strict “publication” requirement
Typical examples	Public insults, accusations of crime or immorality	Harassment, petty bullying, annoying or troubling acts
Penalty level	Can be grave or simple (more serious if grave)	Usually treated as a light offense
Focus of complaint	“Siniraan ang pangalan ko”	“Ginugulo, ginagambala, o inaabala ako nang walang dahilan”

In practice, if the main injury is to your reputation, lawyers often file slander. If the main injury is harassment/annoyance, they file unjust vexation.

VI. Where and How to File a Criminal Complaint

A. Barangay Conciliation (Katarungang Pambarangay)

For many minor conflicts (especially between neighbors or persons living in the same city/municipality), the law requires prior barangay conciliation before going to the prosecutor or court.

Slander and unjust vexation, being generally less grave / light offenses, often fall within disputes that must be brought first to the Lupong Tagapamayapa of the barangay.
Exceptions (no need for barangay conciliation) include, among others:
- When one party is a government employee acting in official function
- When the offense’s penalty exceeds a certain threshold (serious crimes)
- When parties are not residents of the same city/municipality
- Certain cases involving persons in authority or public order

If required and not complied with, the complaint in court may be dismissed for lack of prior barangay conciliation.

B. Venue: Where to File

Slander and unjust vexation are usually filed in the place where:

For slander: the defamatory words were uttered and heard; or where the offended party resides, depending on circumstances and jurisprudence.
For unjust vexation: where the vexatious act was committed.

C. First Step: Complaint-Affidavit

You generally start with a complaint-affidavit filed with the Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor.

The complaint-affidavit usually includes:

Title and parties
- “Juan Dela Cruz, Complainant, vs. Pedro Santos, Respondent.”
Personal circumstances
- Name, age, civil status, address of complainant and respondent.
Statement of facts
- Clear, chronological narration of what happened:
  - When, where, and how the slander/unjust vexation occurred
  - Exact words uttered (if slander) or acts done (if unjust vexation)
  - Who were present (witnesses)
  - How it affected you (humiliation, anxiety, etc.)
Legal characterization
- Statement that the acts constitute oral defamation or unjust vexation punishable under the Revised Penal Code.
Prayer
- Request that the respondent be investigated and eventually prosecuted.
Verification and jurat
- The affidavit must be subscribed and sworn to before a prosecutor, notary public, or authorized officer.

D. Supporting Evidence and Annexes

Attach all relevant evidence, such as:

Witness affidavits – people who heard the defamatory words or saw the vexatious acts.
Audio/video recordings – subject to admissibility and compliance with the Anti-Wiretapping Law:
- Secret recording of private communications may be illegal.
- Recordings made openly in public places are generally less problematic.
Screenshots, photos, messages – if the act crosses into online defamation, it may actually be libel or cyber libel, not mere slander.
Medical/psychological reports, if you suffered stress or physical reactions.

VII. Prosecutor’s Investigation (Inquest / Preliminary Investigation)

Once filed, the prosecutor (Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor):

Dockets the case and may issue a subpoena to the respondent.
The respondent files a counter-affidavit, denying or explaining the allegations, and may attach their own evidence.
Parties may file reply / rejoinder affidavits, depending on the prosecutor’s rules.
There may be a clarificatory hearing where the prosecutor asks questions.

After evaluation, the prosecutor issues a:

Resolution dismissing the complaint, or
Resolution finding probable cause, and prepares an Information to be filed with the proper trial court.

Either party may:

File a Motion for Reconsideration with the same prosecutor’s office;
Elevate the matter to the Department of Justice (DOJ) via petition for review, in appropriate cases.

VIII. Court Proceedings

If an Information is filed in court (typically a Municipal Trial Court / Metropolitan Trial Court for these offenses):

The court issues:
- Warrant of arrest or
- Summons (especially for less serious offenses where the law allows it).
Arraignment
- The accused is informed of the charge and enters a plea (guilty/not guilty).
Pre-trial
- Parties mark evidence, stipulate facts, and explore settlement.
Trial
- The prosecution presents witnesses and evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- The defense presents its own witnesses and evidence.
Decision
- If guilty, the court imposes penalties (imprisonment, fine, or both) and rules on civil liability (damages).
- If acquitted, the criminal case is dismissed; civil liability may still survive in certain situations (depending on the tenor of the decision).

IX. Civil Liability and Damages

In addition to criminal penalties, slander and unjust vexation can give rise to civil liability, such as:

Moral damages – for injury to feelings, reputation, mental anguish.
Exemplary damages – to set an example or correction for public good.
Actual damages – if you can prove actual monetary loss (e.g., lost job).
Attorney’s fees and costs.

Under the Civil Code, some cases of defamation may also be pursued as independent civil actions separate from the criminal case, but strategy varies:

You may reserve your right to file a separate civil action,
Or join the civil aspect with the criminal case,
Or in certain cases file a purely civil case for damages based on defamation without pursuing criminal prosecution.

A lawyer usually decides the best route based on evidence and goals.

X. Defenses Available to the Accused

1. For Slander (Oral Defamation)

Common defenses include:

Truth + good motives / justifiable purpose
- In some defamation cases, if the statement is both true and made with good motives or for justifiable ends (e.g., reporting misconduct to proper authorities), this may be a valid defense.
Privileged communication
- Absolute privilege: Statements made in legislative or judicial proceedings in the proper context.
- Qualified privilege:
  - Fair and true report of official proceedings
  - Statements made in performance of legal, moral, or social duty
  - Communications made in good faith to another with a corresponding interest (e.g., employer evaluating an employee)
Lack of malice / Good faith
- Honest mistake, no intent to defame, belief in truth and fairness.
No publication
- If the alleged defamatory statement was made only to the person involved (no one else heard it), the element of “publication” may be missing.
Unidentifiable offended party
- If no one could reasonably tell who was being referred to, defamation may not lie.
Prescription
- Filing beyond the prescriptive period (crimes under the RPC prescribe after certain time limits, often short for light offenses).

2. For Unjust Vexation

Possible defenses:

Lawful or justifiable exercise of a right or duty
- For example, a guard repeatedly checking your ID in a secured building; annoying but legally justified.
No real “vexation” or annoyance
- The act was trivial, socially acceptable, or a legitimate joke in context, and not reasonably considered vexatious.
Covered by another specific offense
- The prosecutor may argue that the act, if punishable at all, falls under a different offense; the unfair classification as unjust vexation may lead to dismissal.
Lack of intent
- While intent is often inferred from the act, proof that there was no intention to annoy can help.
Consent or tolerance
- If the offended party clearly consented or previously tolerated the acts.

XI. Evidence and Practical Issues

When dealing with slander or unjust vexation complaints, practical issues often arise:

Witness availability
- Many cases fail because witnesses refuse to testify, especially neighbors or co-workers.
Recordings
- Audio/video recordings can be powerful but must respect privacy and anti-wiretapping laws.
- Secret recording of a private conversation may itself be unlawful, though there are nuanced exceptions and jurisprudence.
Online dimension
- If the defamatory act is done online (posts, comments, viral videos), it may already be libel or cyber libel, not simple slander. Different rules on venue, penalties, and prescription may apply.
Cost-benefit
- Filing and pursuing a case takes time, money, and emotional energy. Some parties choose settlement, apology, or barangay-level resolution instead of full prosecution.

XII. Risk of Counter-Charges

Filing a false or malicious criminal complaint may expose the complainant to:

Perjury – for knowingly false statements under oath.
Incriminatory machinations – maliciously imputing an offense to an innocent person.
Unjust vexation or defamation – if the complaint itself is used as a tool to harass or defame.

Hence, complaints should be based on truthful, well-supported facts, not just emotion or revenge.

XIII. Practical Takeaways

Slander (oral defamation) focuses on reputation; unjust vexation focuses on annoyance/harassment.
Both are criminal offenses under the Revised Penal Code, with relatively lighter penalties compared to serious crimes but still serious enough to lead to a record, fines, or imprisonment.
Many cases, especially among neighbors or small communities, must first pass through barangay conciliation.
A solid complaint-affidavit plus supporting evidence (witnesses, documents, recordings) is crucial. Weak evidence often leads to dismissal.
There are meaningful defenses available to the accused, particularly in defamation cases (truth, privilege, good faith, lack of publication).
Because procedural rules, penalties, and jurisprudence evolve, and facts are always unique, consulting a Philippine lawyer is strongly advisable before filing or responding to a complaint.

If you want, you can describe a specific situation (without names), and I can help you map it to whether it looks more like slander, unjust vexation, or possibly another offense, and outline how a complaint-affidavit might be structured.